15 Nov
2005
15 Nov
'05
9:40 a.m.
On 2005-Nov-14 19:08:52 -0800, Greg Haerr <greg(a)censoft.com> wrote:
You can make SS and DS the same but this means that there's nothing
stopping the stack growing down into the heap or vice versa. This
makes the stack accessible from the data space but gives no protection
(note that I was referring to reproducing Unix protection).
--
Peter Jeremy
This email may contain privileged/confidential information. You may not copy or disclose
this email to anyone without the written permission of the sender. If you have received
this email in error please kindly delete this message and notify the sender. Opinions
expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily the opinions of the
employer.
This email and any attached files should be scanned to detect viruses. No liability will
be accepted by the employer for loss or damage (whether caused by negligence or not) as a
result of email transmission.
One
crucial difference is that Unix has the implicit assumption that the
stack is in the data space - which is not true on the 286. This
difference is fairly critical to Unix and makes it impossible to
accurately reproduce the traditional Unix memory protection.
I don't understand this. If SS is set to DS, in any 16 bit mode,
then doesn't this accomplish the accurate reproduction? I realize
that a 32-bit mode would be required for limit checking.